Having thought about this I think the game is not actually too far wrong. What do higher reputation clubs tend to do when apointing a new manager? They either appoint managers who have had outstanding success elsewhere (a la Chelsea, Liverpool), or they appoint, or at least try to apoint, former players with big reputations (a la Man City), or they apoint managers with proven track levels at their level and preferably the leagues they expect to be in (a la Notts Forrest).
On the point of reputation, I would say it is a greater achievement to move from the Conference South to League 2 (2 leagues up) than it is to move from League 2 to the Championship. Partly because there are more promotion places available, and partly because there is such a big change when it comes to going professional. However reputations probebly should not relect this. Lets face it, in the football world, the manager who finds himself in the Championship is likely to have far greater notoriety then the higher acheiver in League two.
Another point that occured to me is that the difference between having unknown/obsure/local/regional reputation shouldn't really have that much effect when it comes to signing players. After all, whatever the case, the players you will be trying to sign won't have heard of you anyway! (Although I guess that depends on the definition of the word regional).
That's my two cents worth. :thup:
Linear Mode
